Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Cannabis Regulation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Senate Judiciary hears SB 162 cannabis omnibus on hoop houses, map access and licensing changes

2330087 · February 17, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Senate Committee on Judiciary heard public testimony Feb. 17 on Senate Bill 162, a cannabis omnibus that would allow law enforcement to destroy hoop houses during warrants, broaden interagency access to the OLCC licensed‑grow map, roll back a 2022 expansion of school setbacks for pre‑K and kindergarten programs, and permit ODA inspections of hemp biomass.

The Senate Committee on Judiciary held a public hearing on Monday, Feb. 17, on Senate Bill 162, a 2025 cannabis omnibus that includes measures on law enforcement powers, interagency access to a licensed-cultivation map, setback rules for early childhood facilities and hemp inspection authority.

Senate Committee staff summarized the bill’s main elements as permitting the destruction of hoop houses during searches for unlawful marijuana production, granting the Oregon Water Resources Department and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality access to the Oregon Liquor and Cannabis Commission (OLCC) map of licensed marijuana and industrial hemp operations, repealing a 2022 expansion of setback distances as applied to pre-kindergarten and kindergarten programs, and allowing the Oregon Department of Agriculture (ODA) to inspect industrial hemp biomass for average THC levels. The staff summary also said the introduced version included an $11,100,000 general‑fund appropriation to the illegal marijuana market enforcement program fund and that a dash‑1 amendment would remove that appropriation and add multi‑year licensing authority for OLCC licensees.

Why it matters: committee members and industry witnesses described the bill as a package of technical and safety fixes aimed at addressing public‑safety and regulatory problems tied to large illicit grows in parts of Oregon and to burdensome or unclear rules that affect licensed businesses. Supporters stressed public‑safety risks to officers and environmental harms tied to large illicit grows; industry witnesses emphasized business certainty and regulatory efficiency.

Rob Ovett, an adjunct professor at Lewis & Clark Law School who presented the bill to the committee staff, said the hoop‑house provision was intended to reduce risk to law enforcement. “These have begun to pose a real health problem, health and safety problem for our law enforcement officers, taking them down as part of the very large, cartel grows,” Ovett said. He said some county attorneys had asked for the authority to be clearly stated in statute.

Ovett also described the map‑access change as a way to route regulatory problems to regulators rather than law enforcement and to give investigators additional information when preparing warrants. He told the committee that the map would remain unavailable to the general public to avoid exposing licensed growers to crime.

Industry testimony focused on rolling back the 2022 expansion that had added pre‑K and kindergarten programs into specified setback distances. Tony Birch, who identified himself as the owner of a retail, manufacturing and distribution cannabis company and a Cannabis Industry Alliance of Oregon board member, said repealing the expansion would “return the setback requirements to the way that the law was originally written and how the industry operated for nearly a decade” and argued the change would reduce business uncertainty caused by new setback requirements.

Ovett and staff explained the introduced bill had included a general‑fund appropriation to renew the illegal marijuana market enforcement grant program (IMMEGP), but that the dash‑1 amendment removes that appropriation and the sponsor has asked that the funding request be pursued in the Criminal Justice Commission budget bill (House Bill 5005). Ovett said the IMMEGP funds enforcement and victim‑services work tied to illicit grows and that the program will need new funding in the next biennium.

The committee closed the public hearing after two in‑person witnesses testified and one remote witness experienced technical difficulties. Committee staff noted that written testimony would be accepted through the posted deadline.

Next steps: committee staff and the bill presenter said the appropriation language would be pursued in the budget bill rather than SB 162, and the dash‑1 language and any needed technical fixes will be posted as amendments for committee consideration.